This game isn't a remake etc, let's clear this up.

Post by **Suiko** » 23 Sep 2009

I still see some people here and there "insist" that this is a direct remake of SH 1, I know you guys have seen these posts, and the ones who post it you know who you are. That said, I think the way to sum up a remake is look at a few of these games.

Resident Evil for gamecube, usually dubbed REmake. - The game is, essentially, the first Resident Evil game, but with vastly improved graphics/sound, and added extras that were implemented in order to keep the game up to date and give it a fresh feeling. It's still in a mansion in the woods, all the same locations.

Final Fantasy III and IV for DS. - These two games follow the same story, but the graphics have been completely revamped and the soundtracks completely updated. The story is the same here as well, with no real major changes. Same as REmake, same areas except added bonus stuff that isn't major.

Here's one to consider as well, the original Super Mario Bros. 3, and the remade ones for gameboy and also the one on Super Mario All-Stars for SNES. - They play exactly the same for the most part, levels are the same, but the graphics are updated, keeping in touch with the updated feel, the "remake" feel.

So I suppose a video game "remake" pretty much follows these guidelines most, if not all of the time.

-Improved graphics.
-Updated music/sound.
-Same story with very minor tweaks possible.
-Same gameplay/environment, although with minor changes possible.

So when you look at facts, at how things being totally frozen, no combat, completely switched up environments/characters/story, SH:SM really doesn't fall under the remake category. Re-imagining is the term being used, but it seems people act braindead to what that means, (not trying to offend anyone here), so a better way to put it is this.

SH:SM is a Remix. Think of a remix of a song, you listen to it, you recognize the basic beats and riffs of the original, but the song you're listening to is still completely different. Maybe you like this remix more, maybe the original is better, but they are very obviously different as far as general structure, and usually even different on who "made" them. (Team Silent/Climax in this case.) So before you blow up on how this game having no combat and everything's frozen makes no sense for a remake, please realize that that would be something to get angry over...if this was actually a remake.

Post by **simeonalo** » 23 Sep 2009

It makes me cringe when people call SM a "remake"

Post by **alone in the town** » 23 Sep 2009

It makes me cringe when people insist on reinforcing the distinction, especially since I personally don't see many people who truly believe Silent Hill: Shattered Memories is a simple modernization of Silent Hill.

Sure, it's technically a re-telling. Or re-imagining. I still won't menstruate if I see it referred to as a re-make. The fuel I pump into my car is in fact a liquid, but I won't go crazy if people call it 'gas'.

Post by **Skele** » 23 Sep 2009

^haha Alone.

Post by **Suiko** » 23 Sep 2009

^ I should have really cleaned up the part about people saying they see this as a remake. I do see it here, but this isn't the only board that I read about this game. Around here, there's just a small few who say it's a remake. On GameFAQs and other places? Oh god, such horrible discussions, that's why I usually only post here, I don't bother posting else where, I just read. And specifically I don't get angry when they say it's a remake, because in small quantities of examples, it is. But when people say the game is ruined because the first one didn't have ice and you could shoot things? That's just dumb. Also what the hell's with all the cringing? You guys gotta shit or something? j/k

Post by **kideatsu** » 23 Sep 2009

This is just a way of Climax messing with us fans psychologically...it's a secret subliminal advertising scheme...

Post by **Jecht** » 23 Sep 2009

Gamefaqs IQ is lower than a box of rocks. Most people on there have no clue what they are talking about and if you disagree, you are a "noob" to them. Especially any of the Silent Hill boards.

Another thing that drives me crazy is when people say this game is going to be a "sleeper" hit. No, it's not. It's predicted to be a hit already, especially after it won, Wii Game of E3 from IGN

Post by **Matt S** » 23 Sep 2009

When it comes to Silent Hill games these days, some people really just react emotionally without listening.

Post by **simeonalo** » 24 Sep 2009

Jecht wrote:Gamefaqs IQ is lower than a box of rocks. Most people on there have no clue what they are talking about and if you disagree, you are a "noob" to them. Especially any of the Silent Hill boards.

Another thing that drives me crazy is when people say this game is going to be a "sleeper" hit. No, it's not. It's predicted to be a hit already, especially after it won, Wii Game of E3 from IGN

totally.

Post by **Aavri** » 24 Sep 2009

I thought there was a topic like this on the gamefaqs board to clear up that this is not a remake. I don't know about the other boreds. I agree on this board there is almost no one calling it a remake anymore.

Post by **Deathbywoodenplank** » 24 Sep 2009

THANK YOU

No really, I hate how people are holding this game so closely to the original. I've actually never seen the word "remake" used in any of the interviews, but instead the word "re-envisioning". The word was then stretched out to "remake". The game isn't SUPPOSED to be like the first, aside from names and locations. It's basically taking the story and saying "hey, let's see what would happen if he was put in THIS situation as opposed to this one. Also, how would a more modern Harry Mason cope?"

I think it's great that it isn't a direct remake. There's too many tight expectations to meet.

Post by **SilentObserver** » 24 Sep 2009

Eh, i see it as Climax wishing to tell a story that's already been told. It's no different than movies - but we call those "remakes" instead of "re-imaginings."

At least with a "remake" you'd be able to weed out the people who won't like it because it's not as 'good' as the original (like movies, even though the originals of many movies suck, the remakes somehow get looked over, or touted as 'bad' because someone else has already had the idea).. but a 're-imagining' is something new to videogames (this is the second one I've seen advertised as such)

Also, at least they are trying real hard to keep us all happy, even with their changes. That beats the hell out of putting out a game that has a bunch of recognizable symbols in it just to make money off of the fans (I'm looking at you, DH) ..

Post by **crucifix** » 24 Sep 2009

HURR SEMANTICS

Post by **Suiko** » 24 Sep 2009

Really I posted this just to do what I said, clear it up with anyone confused what this game really is. People who already know it's a re-imagining or whatever don't have to get butt hurt at me trying to reinforce the point, I'm just clearing it up for those out there that really don't know all the details, because they really don't have many references to go on. If this did help anyone out, glad it did, if it pissed any of you off, then you're funny because I had no intention of that happening. Either way have a good day everyone.

Post by **SilentObserver** » 24 Sep 2009

You don't post things into a forum with the intention of never getting a response. If you wish to do that, ask a moderator to lock it after your post.

With that said, i think the people whose opinions you'd like to hear are the ones who know what this game is going to be. If the rest of the world can't get it by now then don't even bother trying to help them.

And who is butthurt? those of us who agreed with you just put it into different words. it was still the same basic point being made

Post by **Skele** » 24 Sep 2009

if you want an honest opinion, imo it's a remake. it's just they've decided to change things the way they see fit, in order to deliver what they believe will be a better game.

this whole "re-imagining" nonsense was only tossed out to us fans so we wouldn't throw our copies into a fire, and curse Climax.

Post by **Suiko** » 24 Sep 2009

Nah, it's ok, I wanted people to put their thoughts on this, I just know that some people get a little agitated now with topics/posts like these just because there's been so many. Is what I said an opinion? Yes. But I tried to use as many facts as I could to show how this isn't a remake in a realistic manner, I've played plenty of video game remakes, and I don't get that vibe from this. I mean even when I first saw this game, first thing I thought was, "awesome, a new silent hill", even when i read that it had ties to the first one, I never got that vibe that it was a remake, I'm sure others were the same way.

What this topic boils down too for the most part is info for those who don't know, and general discussion because the game isn't out yet, and there isn't much to talk about. And yeah I know most people who have accounts on the board do know, but not all the general passing by readers know about this type of discussion. And yeah sorry about the butt hurt statement, I wanted to be blunt and that came to mind.

Post by **Aavri** » 25 Sep 2009

Skele wrote:if you want an honest opinion, imo it's a remake. it's just they've decided to change things the way they see fit, in order to deliver what they believe will be a better game.

this whole "re-imagining" nonsense was only tossed out to us fans so we wouldn't throw our copies into a fire, and curse Climax.

actually, re-imagining has been using by directors and critics with in about the last five years to discribe a story that has already been told, but the director/screen writer wanted to till it in thier own way. Sure, re-imagining follows a basic concept of a remake in taking the basic soncepts of the original, but pass that the writer can change the whole story. Mainly see, planet of the apes. Also, if I remember one of the trailers for the new version of holloween, they never said remake. They said The retelling of halloween on how Ozzy invisioned it to be. Basicly, a re-imagining is a retelling of the way the creator invisioned it to be. Also a cheap way to keep off flaming fans of the original.

Finally, Alone, I feel that the gas analogy doesn't really fit with this. It is more of a "I used dark blue but people still call it blue." Thing.

Post by **alone in the town** » 25 Sep 2009

The point of the analogy is that it doesn't matter whether we call it a re-make or re-imagining. The term 're-make' is quite frequently used to substitute for what is accurately a 're-imagining', and either way, it is what it is and most people can be told that Silent Hill: Shattered Memories is a re-make of Silent Hill without thinking that it's a shot-by-shot reconstruction. Thus, getting annoyed by such semantics is foolish.

Post by **Suiko** » 25 Sep 2009

I guess if I wanted to directly argue with the point of, is this game a remake or re-imagining, the best thing I could ask is this,

What makes you think this game is a remake, and you can't say the game loosely uses SH1 characters/plot?

I say you can't use that point, because of what it is, a vague and general use of the first games elements, but changed up to be made very different.

I just wanna see what it is that makes people feel that way towards the game, I'm not gonna get angry and yell you're wrong, it's just I dug up facts for my side so I want to see yours. Also I understand most people that feel it's a remake are still going to buy the game, so this isn't an attack or force of opinion, just discussion to pass the time until release. So please, keep it clean.

(This isn't directed at any one individual, just the opposing general opinion.)